Nitrogen fertiliser boosts agricultural yields, but its excessive use destabilises ecosystems. That is why Dutch policy makers want to reduce nitrogen pollution on dairy farms. Cleaner technologies and structural changes could reduce farm emissions. We benchmarked farms, organised an expert consultation, and reviewed the literature to determine the degree to which the lack of available internal and external finance is a barrier to reducing nitrogen pollution. Although the average dairy farm in our sample can finance these investments, a significant share of farmers cannot. We find that investments vastly drain the currently accessible finances available to dairy farmers. Subsidies to reduce the price of investments and measures to increase farm net cash flows could mitigate this problem, while equity funds or preferential interest rate systems would be ineffective. Farm management is not bound by access to finance. Our findings suggest that improved management could vastly reduce the accumulation of nitrogen surplus on farms. Interestingly, we estimate that this can be achieved while increasing profits. The wide-scale adoption of best practices can be facilitated by establishing and financing advisory services and peer learning programmes to spread knowledge and awareness.
In 2023–2024, farmer protests swept across Europe, with tractors blocking roads and supermarkets, drawing significant media attention. Unlike previous protests, these events spread continent-wide, suggesting a contagion effect. This paper documents the surge in farmer protests, explores their triggers and underlying causes, and emphasizes the need for a just transition to sustainable food systems. The protests were sparked by proposed policy changes, tighter environmental regulations, perceived pressures on farm incomes and increased trade competition. However, the root causes varied by country. Swift policy responses at both national and EU levels included retracting controversial measures like the Sustainable Use of Pesticides Regulation, but these actions also hindered key initiatives for transitioning to more sustainable agri-food systems. Moving forward, a comprehensive public debate on the future of Europe's agri-food systems is crucial, focusing on balancing environmental sustainability with the economic viability of agriculture. A major political challenge will be moving beyond simplistic dichotomies to develop a vision for a food system that fosters synergies between farmer interests as well as environmental and social objectives.
This article proposes a tailored approach to reduce antimicrobial use (AMU) in livestock among EU countries, in alignment with the EU Farm-to-Fork initiative that targets a 50 per cent reduction by 2030. We argue against a one-size-fits-all target and introduce country-specific targets based on individual factors such as current antimicrobial sales, GDP, and livestock and human densities. Using data from the European Surveillance of Veterinary Antimicrobial Consumption (ESVAC), the article identifies countries with high densities of animals and humans, as well as high levels of AMU per livestock unit, such as Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain and Poland, as needing to prioritise greater reduction efforts. The article also underlines the need for a more precise EU-level indicator of AMU, as sales do not directly represent use. It suggests that specific targets and regulations should apply to antimicrobials classified as ‘Highest Priority Critically Important Antimicrobials’ by the WHO. The article recommends extending these targets to different sectors and even individual farms, with high-consumption sectors and poorly performing farms making greater efforts. By considering these factors, the article aims to provide a fair and effective approach to reducing AMU, mitigate the risks associated with antimicrobial resistance, and contribute to achieving the Farm-to-Fork strategy AMU reduction target.
The objective of this study was to analyse and compare the interventions (sets of actions) towards improved antimicrobial use (AMU) in animal production. These were designed in Living Labs (LLs) organised in five countries of the ROADMAP project, with ex ante impact assessment (EAIA) to guide the process. LL participants designed very different types of interventions which targeted systematically farmers and veterinarians but less frequently other stakeholders, despite the ROADMAP ambition to involve the whole value chain in AMU transition scenarios. A variety of factors influenced which interventions were designed, such as the country's AMU levels, existence of AMU monitoring systems, the possibility for veterinarians to profit from antimicrobials sales, export-orientation of the animal production sector and political momentum. Other influential factors included the breadth of desired impacts that the LL participants wished to produce through the interventions they designed (limited to animal health aspects or encompassing other subjects such as animal welfare, consumer information or veterinary business models) and the LL process (choice of participants and facilitators). Overall, the approach succeeded in providing a holistic vision of the possible measures and the obstacles towards improved AMU and produced context-tailored interventions with high acceptability. However, they had limited results in terms of system rethinking.
The reduction of antimicrobial use (AMU) in veterinary medicine is nowadays largely associated with the development of preventive approaches in animal health. This article aims to understand the transformation of veterinarians’ practices, knowledge and working conditions in relation to the promotion of the prudent use of antimicrobials. It analyses the organisational and structural factors that currently favour the development of preventive approaches. The research draws from both a qualitative study and a quantitative survey. The qualitative study sought to understand the views and experiences of veterinarians in different countries. It highlights the difficulties encountered by veterinarians in implementing preventive approaches and promoting prudent AMU. The quantitative survey aimed to understand the variability of veterinarians' attitudes towards AMU and antimicrobial resistance (AMR). It identifies several clusters within the profession, which are distributed differently according to countries, sectors and working conditions, and within which each veterinarian develops different ways of thinking and acting in relation to AMR. We conclude by emphasising the major structural factors that we believe need to be supported to maintain the ongoing transition towards prudent AMU and preventive approaches in animal health. We also suggest different ways of engaging the profession according to the different contexts identified.
La lutte contre la résistance aux antimicrobiens (RAM) s'appuie généralement sur un large ensemble de mesures, telles que l'interdiction ou la restriction de l'utilisation de certaines molécules, la promotion d'approches préventives en santé animale, le contrôle de l'usage et de la prescription des antibiotiques, la formation des éleveurs et des vétérinaires ou encore le développement de démarches qualité et de labels. Ces mesures peuvent être obligatoires (c'est-à-dire des réglementations) ou volontaires (c'est-à-dire des normes privées, des lignes directrices professionnelles, etc.), selon le style d'action publique adopté dans chaque pays: imposer le même cadre d'action pour tout le monde ou tenter de stimuler les initiatives des parties prenantes. Il est cependant difficile de dire qu'une option est meilleure qu'une autre car la réduction de l'utilisation des antimicrobiens dans l’élevage a été obtenue dans différents pays européens en utilisant différentes options. Fondé sur une réflexion croisée de trois études de cas du projet ROADMAP, ce Point de Vue soutient qu'une politique de RAM efficace et légitime doit adopter une combinaison de mesures volontaires et obligatoires soigneusement réfléchies et adaptées aux contextes et dynamiques locaux.
Die Bekämpfung antimikrobieller Resistenzen (AMR) umfasst in der Regel eine Reihe an Maßnahmen, wie das Verbot oder die Einschränkung der Verwendung bestimmter Moleküle, die Förderung präventiver Ansätze im Bereich der Tiergesundheit, das Monitoring des Antibiotikaeinsatzes und -verschreibungen, die Schulung von Landwirten/−innen und Tierärzten/−innen sowie die Entwicklung von Qualitätssystemen und -kennzeichnungen. Diese Maßnahmen können verpflichtend (d. h. Vorschriften) oder freiwillig (d. h. private Standards, Berufsrichtlinien etc.) sein, je nachdem, welcher Politikstil in den einzelnen Ländern verfolgt wird: die Auferlegung eines gleichen Handlungsrahmens für alle oder der Versuch, die Initiativen der Interessengruppen zu fördern. Es ist jedoch schwierig zu sagen, dass eine Option besser als eine andere ist, da ein Rückgang im Einsatz antimikrobieller Mittel in der Tierhaltung in verschiedenen europäischen Ländern mittels unterschiedlicher Optionen erreicht wurde. Anhand einer Querschnittsbetrachtung dreier ROADMAP-Fallstudien wird in diesem Point de Vue argumentiert, dass eine effiziente und legitime AMR-Politik eine Kombination aus freiwilligen und verpflichtenden Maßnahmen erfordert, die sorgfältig durchdacht und an die lokalen Gegebenheiten und Dynamiken angepasst ist.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：